Saturday, May 1, 2010
State of Emergency Declared in Massachusetts
Earlier today, a water main broke in Weston (about 20 miles west of Boston) spilling an estimated 8 million gallons an hour into the Charles River. The break affects 36 communities in eastern Massachusetts comprising 2 million people including the City of Boston.
Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick declared a state of emergency and residents are being ordered to boil drinking water. A state of emergency has also been declared by Boston Mayor Tom Menino.
At the risk of being crass I've been thinking how this crisis will affect Patrick's chances at re-election in November. The shorter the duration of the crisis the better it will be for Patrick. While Republican gubernatorial candidate Charlie Baker and Democrat turned indepedent Tim Cahill snipe at each other Patrick can point to how he handled a crisis. But if it takes weeks for the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority to repair the water main then Patrick might be subject to a lot of heat.
Speaking of heat, temperatures are expected to hit 90 degrees tomorrow. It couldn't be a worse time for a water main to break. Let's hope things aren't compounded with power outages.
As for me I am fine at the moment. I have several bottles of water and other assorted beverages. I am fortunate because bottled water is in short supply as you can imagine. Under the circumstances, I am sorely tempted to head to Walden Pond tomorrow for a swim.
Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick declared a state of emergency and residents are being ordered to boil drinking water. A state of emergency has also been declared by Boston Mayor Tom Menino.
At the risk of being crass I've been thinking how this crisis will affect Patrick's chances at re-election in November. The shorter the duration of the crisis the better it will be for Patrick. While Republican gubernatorial candidate Charlie Baker and Democrat turned indepedent Tim Cahill snipe at each other Patrick can point to how he handled a crisis. But if it takes weeks for the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority to repair the water main then Patrick might be subject to a lot of heat.
Speaking of heat, temperatures are expected to hit 90 degrees tomorrow. It couldn't be a worse time for a water main to break. Let's hope things aren't compounded with power outages.
As for me I am fine at the moment. I have several bottles of water and other assorted beverages. I am fortunate because bottled water is in short supply as you can imagine. Under the circumstances, I am sorely tempted to head to Walden Pond tomorrow for a swim.
Friday, April 30, 2010
MLB Notes for April
Here are some observations about the happenings in MLB in the first month of the 2010 season.
1. Tampa Bay Rays
At 17-6, the Rays have the best record in MLB. They appear to have regained the form that earned them an AL championship in 2008 especially their starting rotation. Matt Garza, James Shields and David Price have a combined record of 10-2 with an ERA of 2.68.
The downside with the Rays is their attendance. Despite their early success they have not drawn well at Tropicana Field. Fewer than 11,000 fans showed up to see the Rays two nights ago as they downed the Oakland Athletics 10-3.
2. Baltimore Orioles
The Orioles are already 12 games back of the Rays in the AL East with a MLB worst 5-18 record (although they have won three of their last five games).
They weren't expected to be a contender but they weren't expected to be this bad either. Rookie southpaw Brian Matusz is the only member of the starting rotation to record a win accounting for half the team's victories this season. The bullpen (outside of Will Ohman and Jason Berken) have been even worse.
But their offense has been the most disappointing aspect of their game. The O's miss Brian Roberts at the top of their order and the team has been slumping at the plate. Only Ty Wigginton (who is filling for Roberts at 2B) and the reacquired Miguel Tejada have been hitting with any consistency.
Needless to say manager Dave Trembley is living on borrowed time.
3. New York Mets
A couple of weeks ago, Mets skipper Jerry Manuel found himself on the hot seat as well. But that was before the Mets played a 20-inning game with the St. Louis Cardinals in which they prevailed 2-1. Since the 20-inning game, the Mets have gone 10-2 and are currently on an eight game winning streak. They now occupy first place in the NL East with a 1½ game lead over the defending NL champion Philadelphia Phillies.
Move over Johan Santana. Mike Pelfrey wants to be the ace of the staff. David Wright has the right stuff again while rookie first baseman Ike Davis might give Justin Heyward of the Atlanta Braves a run for his money in the NL Rookie of the Year balloting.
4. Atlanta Braves
The Braves, on the other hand, have gone in entirely the opposite direction. On April 20th, the Braves were 8-5. They tend embarked on a 9 game losing streak which ended this evening with a 4-2 victory over the Houston Astros. What a difference ten days can make. Although they are now in last place in the NL East they are still only five games back of the Mets. It can't be much fun for Bobby Cox no matter how much he watches Justin Heyward play.
5. A Topsy Turvy NL West (San Diego Padres & Los Angeles Dodgers)
If you asked most people to predict the NL West before the beginning of the season the Dodgers would have likely been picked to finish first while the Padres likely would have been picked to finish last. Yet at 15-8, the Padres own the best record in the NL at one point winning eight games in a row. The Dodgers snapped a five game losing streak tonight against the Pirates but remain six games back of the Padres.
While the Padres have no pressure on them the Dodgers are under constant scrutiny. Despite Dodgers centerfielder Matt Kemp leading the team in home runs and RBIs it didn't prevent Dodgers GM Ned Coletti from publicly ripping him earlier this week for his defensive play.
6. Kelly Johnson, Arizona Diamondbacks
Who would have picked the former Braves castoff to be leading the NL in home runs with 9? The D'Backs second baseman hit 8 home runs in slightly over 300 at bats with the Braves last season. The Braves could sure use him about now.
7. Paul Konerko, Chicago White Sox
Meanwhile, the veteran Chisox first baseman is leading MLB with 11 home runs.
8. Matt Capps, Washington Nationals
After being made to walk the plank by the Pittsburgh Pirates in the offseason, all Capps has done in first month of the 2010 season is to save 10 games which gives him the lead in the NL. Capps has been the crucial figure in the Nationals' strong April showing. The Pirates meanwhile signed Octavio Dotel, a closer nearly a decade older than Capps. Dotel has saved only three games for the Bucs this season.
9. Trevor Hoffman, Milwaukee Brewers
The all-time MLB leader in saves needs only six more to reach 600 for his career. But it's not going well for him. Apparently, NL hitters can't distinguish between his fastball and his changeup. As of this writing, Hoffman is 1-2 with an astronomical 13.00 ERA with only three saves to show for his troubles. He has given up 13 runs in only nine innings pitched. The ninth inning used to be "Trevor Time." Well, now time appears to be closing on the game's greatest relief pitcher.
10. Colby Lewis, Texas Rangers
The Rangers starter is the very definition of a reclamation project. Originally a supplemental first round draft pick by the Rangers in the 1999 MLB Draft (teammate Josh Hamilton was top pick in that draft) Lewis never lived up to expectations. He did win 10 games for the Rangers in 2003 but recorded an ERA of 7.30. Lewis would hurt his shoulder the following year and spent the next three seasons with four different organizations (Detroit Tigers, Washington Nationals, Oakland Athletics and Kansas City Royals) before going to Japan prior to the 2008 season.
It was in Japan that Lewis modifiied his pitching style. After spending two seasons in Japan, Lewis returned to the Rangers this off-season. As of this writing, Lewis is 3-0 with a 2.76 ERA. Tonight, he may have pitched his greatest game of his big league career against the Seattle Mariners. Lewis pitched nine shutout innings striking out ten batters. He surrendered only three hits while walking one batter. Unfortunately, the game was still scoreless into extra innings so Lewis did not figure in the decision but the Rangers would win 2-0 in 12 innings. Lewis is an early candidate to be 2010 AL Comeback Player of the Year.
1. Tampa Bay Rays
At 17-6, the Rays have the best record in MLB. They appear to have regained the form that earned them an AL championship in 2008 especially their starting rotation. Matt Garza, James Shields and David Price have a combined record of 10-2 with an ERA of 2.68.
The downside with the Rays is their attendance. Despite their early success they have not drawn well at Tropicana Field. Fewer than 11,000 fans showed up to see the Rays two nights ago as they downed the Oakland Athletics 10-3.
2. Baltimore Orioles
The Orioles are already 12 games back of the Rays in the AL East with a MLB worst 5-18 record (although they have won three of their last five games).
They weren't expected to be a contender but they weren't expected to be this bad either. Rookie southpaw Brian Matusz is the only member of the starting rotation to record a win accounting for half the team's victories this season. The bullpen (outside of Will Ohman and Jason Berken) have been even worse.
But their offense has been the most disappointing aspect of their game. The O's miss Brian Roberts at the top of their order and the team has been slumping at the plate. Only Ty Wigginton (who is filling for Roberts at 2B) and the reacquired Miguel Tejada have been hitting with any consistency.
Needless to say manager Dave Trembley is living on borrowed time.
3. New York Mets
A couple of weeks ago, Mets skipper Jerry Manuel found himself on the hot seat as well. But that was before the Mets played a 20-inning game with the St. Louis Cardinals in which they prevailed 2-1. Since the 20-inning game, the Mets have gone 10-2 and are currently on an eight game winning streak. They now occupy first place in the NL East with a 1½ game lead over the defending NL champion Philadelphia Phillies.
Move over Johan Santana. Mike Pelfrey wants to be the ace of the staff. David Wright has the right stuff again while rookie first baseman Ike Davis might give Justin Heyward of the Atlanta Braves a run for his money in the NL Rookie of the Year balloting.
4. Atlanta Braves
The Braves, on the other hand, have gone in entirely the opposite direction. On April 20th, the Braves were 8-5. They tend embarked on a 9 game losing streak which ended this evening with a 4-2 victory over the Houston Astros. What a difference ten days can make. Although they are now in last place in the NL East they are still only five games back of the Mets. It can't be much fun for Bobby Cox no matter how much he watches Justin Heyward play.
5. A Topsy Turvy NL West (San Diego Padres & Los Angeles Dodgers)
If you asked most people to predict the NL West before the beginning of the season the Dodgers would have likely been picked to finish first while the Padres likely would have been picked to finish last. Yet at 15-8, the Padres own the best record in the NL at one point winning eight games in a row. The Dodgers snapped a five game losing streak tonight against the Pirates but remain six games back of the Padres.
While the Padres have no pressure on them the Dodgers are under constant scrutiny. Despite Dodgers centerfielder Matt Kemp leading the team in home runs and RBIs it didn't prevent Dodgers GM Ned Coletti from publicly ripping him earlier this week for his defensive play.
6. Kelly Johnson, Arizona Diamondbacks
Who would have picked the former Braves castoff to be leading the NL in home runs with 9? The D'Backs second baseman hit 8 home runs in slightly over 300 at bats with the Braves last season. The Braves could sure use him about now.
7. Paul Konerko, Chicago White Sox
Meanwhile, the veteran Chisox first baseman is leading MLB with 11 home runs.
8. Matt Capps, Washington Nationals
After being made to walk the plank by the Pittsburgh Pirates in the offseason, all Capps has done in first month of the 2010 season is to save 10 games which gives him the lead in the NL. Capps has been the crucial figure in the Nationals' strong April showing. The Pirates meanwhile signed Octavio Dotel, a closer nearly a decade older than Capps. Dotel has saved only three games for the Bucs this season.
9. Trevor Hoffman, Milwaukee Brewers
The all-time MLB leader in saves needs only six more to reach 600 for his career. But it's not going well for him. Apparently, NL hitters can't distinguish between his fastball and his changeup. As of this writing, Hoffman is 1-2 with an astronomical 13.00 ERA with only three saves to show for his troubles. He has given up 13 runs in only nine innings pitched. The ninth inning used to be "Trevor Time." Well, now time appears to be closing on the game's greatest relief pitcher.
10. Colby Lewis, Texas Rangers
The Rangers starter is the very definition of a reclamation project. Originally a supplemental first round draft pick by the Rangers in the 1999 MLB Draft (teammate Josh Hamilton was top pick in that draft) Lewis never lived up to expectations. He did win 10 games for the Rangers in 2003 but recorded an ERA of 7.30. Lewis would hurt his shoulder the following year and spent the next three seasons with four different organizations (Detroit Tigers, Washington Nationals, Oakland Athletics and Kansas City Royals) before going to Japan prior to the 2008 season.
It was in Japan that Lewis modifiied his pitching style. After spending two seasons in Japan, Lewis returned to the Rangers this off-season. As of this writing, Lewis is 3-0 with a 2.76 ERA. Tonight, he may have pitched his greatest game of his big league career against the Seattle Mariners. Lewis pitched nine shutout innings striking out ten batters. He surrendered only three hits while walking one batter. Unfortunately, the game was still scoreless into extra innings so Lewis did not figure in the decision but the Rangers would win 2-0 in 12 innings. Lewis is an early candidate to be 2010 AL Comeback Player of the Year.
MLB Players Association Rips Arizona Immigration Law
A few days ago I wrote about the possible implications the newly passed immigration law in Arizona could have for Major League Baseball given that a significant number of MLB players are from Latin American countries (including Mexico) or are American born with Latino heritage (usually Puerto Rican):
I have no doubt MLB will prep player personnel with regard to the law of the land in Arizona. But if a player were to get caught up in a misunderstanding arising over this legislation the repercussions could have long term effects on MLB's relationship with the state of Arizona.
Today, the Major League Baseball Players Association weighed in on the matter. (H/T Daniel Foster of The Corner at NRO). Michael Weiner, Executive Director of the MLBPA, has asked Arizona to either repeal or modify the law. If the legislation is enacted as is Weiner stated, "If the current law goes into effect, the MLBPA will consider additional steps necessary to protect the rights and interests of our members."
Now, I don't think the Arizona Diamondbacks are going anywhere. But other teams could move their spring training facilities from Arizona. The Arizona Fall League could be relocated and as could the 2011 MLB All-Star Game from Phoenix to another National League city. As of this writing, MLB Commissioner Bud Selig has made no public comment about the law. But if he does speak out and his comments mirror those of Weiner then there could be trouble.
Earlier today, the Arizona legislature announced it had adopted some amendments to the legislation. Whether that will be sufficient to mollify the MLBPA remains to be seen. But even if it does mollify them I suspect it won't mollify pro-amnesty forces who smell blood in the water.
I have no doubt MLB will prep player personnel with regard to the law of the land in Arizona. But if a player were to get caught up in a misunderstanding arising over this legislation the repercussions could have long term effects on MLB's relationship with the state of Arizona.
Today, the Major League Baseball Players Association weighed in on the matter. (H/T Daniel Foster of The Corner at NRO). Michael Weiner, Executive Director of the MLBPA, has asked Arizona to either repeal or modify the law. If the legislation is enacted as is Weiner stated, "If the current law goes into effect, the MLBPA will consider additional steps necessary to protect the rights and interests of our members."
Now, I don't think the Arizona Diamondbacks are going anywhere. But other teams could move their spring training facilities from Arizona. The Arizona Fall League could be relocated and as could the 2011 MLB All-Star Game from Phoenix to another National League city. As of this writing, MLB Commissioner Bud Selig has made no public comment about the law. But if he does speak out and his comments mirror those of Weiner then there could be trouble.
Earlier today, the Arizona legislature announced it had adopted some amendments to the legislation. Whether that will be sufficient to mollify the MLBPA remains to be seen. But even if it does mollify them I suspect it won't mollify pro-amnesty forces who smell blood in the water.
Axelrod Claims Crist Was Run Out of GOP
David Axelrod claims Florida Governor Charlie Crist was run out of the GOP Senate Primary.
In an interview with George Stephanopoulos on Good Morning America Axelrod said, "They recruited him for this Senate race and now he's been run out of the party. It really speaks to the way the party is moving to the right."
Nonsense.
Crist ran himself out of the GOP. Scarcely three weeks ago, Crist ruled out a run as an Independent. Crist's campaign manager Erik Eikenberg insisted that this was nothing more than a rumor launched by Marco Rubio's campaign. Or should I say Crist's ex-campaign manager?
Crist alienated Republicans by going out of his way to support President Obama's stimulus bill. But Rubio also captured the imagination of conservatives and presented a viable alternative to Crist. Rubio would have crushed Crist in the August primary and his political career would have been over. But now Crist has a fighting chance against Rubio and Democratic candidate Kendrick Meek.
Now I don't blame Crist for his actions yesterday. Crist is playing the only card he has left even though he said he wouldn't. It isn't the first time a politician has said he won't do something and does it anyway and it won't be the last.
So I disagree with Rich Lowry when he writes, "Crist could have bowed out gracefully, except it would have required entirely too much grace." Crist is right when he tells the people of Florida, "It's your decision to make." As Jim Antle from The American Spectator writes, "He wants to be around forever. Florida voters may decide they want a more temporary relationship with him." But the elections are just over six months away. A lot is going to happen between now and then and the ride could be bumpier than at Universal Studios Orlando.
In an interview with George Stephanopoulos on Good Morning America Axelrod said, "They recruited him for this Senate race and now he's been run out of the party. It really speaks to the way the party is moving to the right."
Nonsense.
Crist ran himself out of the GOP. Scarcely three weeks ago, Crist ruled out a run as an Independent. Crist's campaign manager Erik Eikenberg insisted that this was nothing more than a rumor launched by Marco Rubio's campaign. Or should I say Crist's ex-campaign manager?
Crist alienated Republicans by going out of his way to support President Obama's stimulus bill. But Rubio also captured the imagination of conservatives and presented a viable alternative to Crist. Rubio would have crushed Crist in the August primary and his political career would have been over. But now Crist has a fighting chance against Rubio and Democratic candidate Kendrick Meek.
Now I don't blame Crist for his actions yesterday. Crist is playing the only card he has left even though he said he wouldn't. It isn't the first time a politician has said he won't do something and does it anyway and it won't be the last.
So I disagree with Rich Lowry when he writes, "Crist could have bowed out gracefully, except it would have required entirely too much grace." Crist is right when he tells the people of Florida, "It's your decision to make." As Jim Antle from The American Spectator writes, "He wants to be around forever. Florida voters may decide they want a more temporary relationship with him." But the elections are just over six months away. A lot is going to happen between now and then and the ride could be bumpier than at Universal Studios Orlando.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
A Reasonable Case for Reasonable Suspicion in Arizona
I must confess that I had some reservations about Arizona's new immigration law. But I wanted more information before I commented one way or the other.
My main concern revolved around "reasonable suspicion." Specifically, what "reasonable suspicion" would lead a state, county or local law enforcement official to believe a person was not in the United States legally and thus take the step of making a formal inquiry into said person's immigration status?
Kris Kobach answers that question in an op-ed in The New York Times titled, "Why Arizona Drew a Line?":
Over the past four decades, federal courts have issued hundreds of opinions defining those two words. The Arizona law didn’t invent the concept: Precedents list the factors that can contribute to reasonable suspicion; when several are combined, the “totality of circumstances” that results may create reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.
For example, the Arizona law is most likely to come into play after a traffic stop. A police officer pulls a minivan over for speeding. A dozen passengers are crammed in. None has identification. The highway is a known alien-smuggling corridor. The driver is acting evasively. Those factors combine to create reasonable suspicion that the occupants are not in the country legally.
That's what I needed. A real world example. The most salient point Kobach (who is running for Secretary of State in Kansas) makes is that Arizona didn't just suddenly invent the term reasonable suspicion. To be certain, reasonable suspicion is open to reasonable debate and reasonable doubt. But it's not as if we don't have any case law to draw upon.
In fact, Rich Lowry from The Corner at National Review Online draws our attention to a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision Muehler v. Mena in which the Court ruled the police did not require reasonable suspicion to ask a person in detention about their immigration status and thus did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Incidentally, the decision was unanimous.
My main concern revolved around "reasonable suspicion." Specifically, what "reasonable suspicion" would lead a state, county or local law enforcement official to believe a person was not in the United States legally and thus take the step of making a formal inquiry into said person's immigration status?
Kris Kobach answers that question in an op-ed in The New York Times titled, "Why Arizona Drew a Line?":
Over the past four decades, federal courts have issued hundreds of opinions defining those two words. The Arizona law didn’t invent the concept: Precedents list the factors that can contribute to reasonable suspicion; when several are combined, the “totality of circumstances” that results may create reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.
For example, the Arizona law is most likely to come into play after a traffic stop. A police officer pulls a minivan over for speeding. A dozen passengers are crammed in. None has identification. The highway is a known alien-smuggling corridor. The driver is acting evasively. Those factors combine to create reasonable suspicion that the occupants are not in the country legally.
That's what I needed. A real world example. The most salient point Kobach (who is running for Secretary of State in Kansas) makes is that Arizona didn't just suddenly invent the term reasonable suspicion. To be certain, reasonable suspicion is open to reasonable debate and reasonable doubt. But it's not as if we don't have any case law to draw upon.
In fact, Rich Lowry from The Corner at National Review Online draws our attention to a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision Muehler v. Mena in which the Court ruled the police did not require reasonable suspicion to ask a person in detention about their immigration status and thus did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Incidentally, the decision was unanimous.
Iran "Elected" to UN Commission on Women's Rights
Yes, you read that right.
Not only that but they were elected by acclamation. Simply put no member state requested a vote including the United States. The Obama Administration at work. But what can you expect? They're too busy directing their animosity towards Israel.
So for the next four years Iran will "evaluate progress on gender equality, identify challenges, set global standards and formulate concrete policies to promote gender equality and advancement of women worldwide."
I wonder what those global standards would be. Arresting women for licking ice cream or eating apples too provocatively?
What's going to happen next? Iran on the UN Disarmament Commission?
Oh wait! That already happened.
Not only that but they were elected by acclamation. Simply put no member state requested a vote including the United States. The Obama Administration at work. But what can you expect? They're too busy directing their animosity towards Israel.
So for the next four years Iran will "evaluate progress on gender equality, identify challenges, set global standards and formulate concrete policies to promote gender equality and advancement of women worldwide."
I wonder what those global standards would be. Arresting women for licking ice cream or eating apples too provocatively?
What's going to happen next? Iran on the UN Disarmament Commission?
Oh wait! That already happened.
Is Gordon Brown Really Sorry?
It appears that Gordon Brown that put the final nail into his coffin and will soon be carried out of 10 Downing Street.
During a campaign stop, Brown had a brief conversation about immigration with Gillian Duffy, a lifelong Labour Party supporter. When Brown returned to his car with his microphone still on he described the encounter as a "disaster" and then called Duffy as "a bigoted woman."
Brown subsequently offered a public apology. But it was completely insincere. He claimed he wasn't given a chance to answer Duffy's question about immigration. Rubbish. Brown ended the conversation. He assailed broadcasters for having "chosen to have played my private conversation."
Gordie, let me break it to you. If you are wearing a microphone there is no private conversation. The fact Brown would try to blame the broadcasters for his words that left his mouth indicates to me that Brown is not sorry for what he said but rather that he is sorry that he got caught.
That said when I learned about this incident the first thing I thought of was Joe The Plumber's encounter with Barack Obama during the 2008 campaign. Now, Obama didn't say anything disparaging about Samuel Wurzelbacher. Yet let's not forget how severely he was scrutinized after meeting with Obama. The point I am making is that if Obama had said something untoward about Gillian Duffy the liberal media would have given Duffy the Joe The Plumber treatment rather than have taken Obama to task.
This isn't to say that the British media isn't left-wing but I find them more even handed in their scrutiny of public officials. Take this tough line of questioning of Andy Burnham, the Secretary of State of Health, over the Brown incident. (In the interest of full disclosure, Burnham was my boss when I worked as an intern for Labour MP Tessa Jowell from January to March 1995. I also must confess that until now I had not realized he had gone on to become an MP and a member of Brown's cabinet).
During a campaign stop, Brown had a brief conversation about immigration with Gillian Duffy, a lifelong Labour Party supporter. When Brown returned to his car with his microphone still on he described the encounter as a "disaster" and then called Duffy as "a bigoted woman."
Brown subsequently offered a public apology. But it was completely insincere. He claimed he wasn't given a chance to answer Duffy's question about immigration. Rubbish. Brown ended the conversation. He assailed broadcasters for having "chosen to have played my private conversation."
Gordie, let me break it to you. If you are wearing a microphone there is no private conversation. The fact Brown would try to blame the broadcasters for his words that left his mouth indicates to me that Brown is not sorry for what he said but rather that he is sorry that he got caught.
That said when I learned about this incident the first thing I thought of was Joe The Plumber's encounter with Barack Obama during the 2008 campaign. Now, Obama didn't say anything disparaging about Samuel Wurzelbacher. Yet let's not forget how severely he was scrutinized after meeting with Obama. The point I am making is that if Obama had said something untoward about Gillian Duffy the liberal media would have given Duffy the Joe The Plumber treatment rather than have taken Obama to task.
This isn't to say that the British media isn't left-wing but I find them more even handed in their scrutiny of public officials. Take this tough line of questioning of Andy Burnham, the Secretary of State of Health, over the Brown incident. (In the interest of full disclosure, Burnham was my boss when I worked as an intern for Labour MP Tessa Jowell from January to March 1995. I also must confess that until now I had not realized he had gone on to become an MP and a member of Brown's cabinet).
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Frampton Thanks Churchill But Voted For Obama
Yesterday, Peter Frampton came out with a new album titled Thank You Mr. Churchill.
It's an autobiographical album which begins with the title track. "It starts with my birth, which I thank Mr. Churchill for bringing my father back from the Second World War," said the British born guitar hero. A live version of the song can be heard here.
I wonder how Frampton's admiration for Churchill sits with President Obama. After all Obama holds Churchill in extraordinarily low regard. Come to think of it I wonder if Frampton is aware of Obama's disdain of The Last Lion.
I ponder this because Frampton backed Obama in the 2008 election. Frampton, who lives near Cincinnati, became a naturalized American citizen after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Frampton is best known for his 1976 double live album Frampton Comes Alive. However, I'm partial to his time with Humble Pie where he shared vocal duties with Steve Marriott of The Small Faces and Greg Ridley of Spooky Tooth for four albums between 1969 and 1971 before embarking on a solo career in 1972. Sadly, both Marriott and Ridley have passed on. My favorite Humble Pie song is called "Home and Away" which was co-written by Frampton and Ridley.
It's an autobiographical album which begins with the title track. "It starts with my birth, which I thank Mr. Churchill for bringing my father back from the Second World War," said the British born guitar hero. A live version of the song can be heard here.
I wonder how Frampton's admiration for Churchill sits with President Obama. After all Obama holds Churchill in extraordinarily low regard. Come to think of it I wonder if Frampton is aware of Obama's disdain of The Last Lion.
I ponder this because Frampton backed Obama in the 2008 election. Frampton, who lives near Cincinnati, became a naturalized American citizen after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Frampton is best known for his 1976 double live album Frampton Comes Alive. However, I'm partial to his time with Humble Pie where he shared vocal duties with Steve Marriott of The Small Faces and Greg Ridley of Spooky Tooth for four albums between 1969 and 1971 before embarking on a solo career in 1972. Sadly, both Marriott and Ridley have passed on. My favorite Humble Pie song is called "Home and Away" which was co-written by Frampton and Ridley.
Could Iran Launch a Nuclear Attack on U.S. From Venezuela?
This is not reassuring.
What is even less reassuring is this Pentagon report will not stir the Obama Administration to take the necessary measures to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
In fact nothing will.
In which case it is not inconceivable that Iranian paramilitary forces would launch a nuclear attack on the United States from Venezuela with the full blessing of Hugo Chavez.
I shudder at the thought. It should give the Obama Administration chills too. But it doesn't because they have no spine.
What is even less reassuring is this Pentagon report will not stir the Obama Administration to take the necessary measures to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
In fact nothing will.
In which case it is not inconceivable that Iranian paramilitary forces would launch a nuclear attack on the United States from Venezuela with the full blessing of Hugo Chavez.
I shudder at the thought. It should give the Obama Administration chills too. But it doesn't because they have no spine.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Will Baseball Fans Boycott The Arizona Diamondbacks?
I have not made any comment concerning immigration legislation signed into law by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer last week. At this point, I will continue to withhold comment until I have some questions I have answered.
However, it is worth noting that boycott efforts against Arizona are already underway including one urging baseball fans to refrain from attending Arizona Diamondbacks games.
As of this writing the D'Backs are 9-10 as we approach the end of April. In 2009, the D'Backs finished in last place in the NL West. If they play like they did last year then baseball fans will refrain from attending D'Backs games, immigration law or no immigration law.
Yet it must be noted that Phoenix is set to host the 2011 MLB All-Star Game. Don't be surprised if pressure is brought to bear against MLB Commissioner Bud Selig to move the game to another National League city. If Selig doesn't bow to that kind of pressure then I think the pro-amnesty forces might urge the game's top Latin American players to refuse to attend the game if they are selected to their league's All Star Team. If someone like Albert Pujols (who is arguably the best player in the game) were to refuse to attend in protest against this law then people will sit up and take notice and for all the wrong reasons.
Currently, there are only 11 players born in Mexico on big league rosters. But there are a lot of players from countries like Venezuela and the Dominican Republic not to mention American players from Puerto Rico. Let's also remember that many of them under spring training in Arizona. And lest we forget the Arizona Fall League.
I have no doubt MLB will prep player personnel with regard to the law of the land in Arizona. But if a player were to get caught up in a misunderstanding arising over this legislation the repercussions could have long term effects on MLB's relationship with the state of Arizona.
However, it is worth noting that boycott efforts against Arizona are already underway including one urging baseball fans to refrain from attending Arizona Diamondbacks games.
As of this writing the D'Backs are 9-10 as we approach the end of April. In 2009, the D'Backs finished in last place in the NL West. If they play like they did last year then baseball fans will refrain from attending D'Backs games, immigration law or no immigration law.
Yet it must be noted that Phoenix is set to host the 2011 MLB All-Star Game. Don't be surprised if pressure is brought to bear against MLB Commissioner Bud Selig to move the game to another National League city. If Selig doesn't bow to that kind of pressure then I think the pro-amnesty forces might urge the game's top Latin American players to refuse to attend the game if they are selected to their league's All Star Team. If someone like Albert Pujols (who is arguably the best player in the game) were to refuse to attend in protest against this law then people will sit up and take notice and for all the wrong reasons.
Currently, there are only 11 players born in Mexico on big league rosters. But there are a lot of players from countries like Venezuela and the Dominican Republic not to mention American players from Puerto Rico. Let's also remember that many of them under spring training in Arizona. And lest we forget the Arizona Fall League.
I have no doubt MLB will prep player personnel with regard to the law of the land in Arizona. But if a player were to get caught up in a misunderstanding arising over this legislation the repercussions could have long term effects on MLB's relationship with the state of Arizona.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Comedy Central Is No Jyllands-Postens Or Is It?
Earlier today, I weighed in on the controversy surrounding the decision of Comedy Central to heavily censor Wednesday night's episode of South Park with regard to the Prophet Mohammed.
I concluded my post by stating, "Comedy Central is no Jyllands-Posten."
I may have spoken too soon because it appears that Jyllands-Posten is putting Kurt Westergaard, the man at the center of the Danish cartoon controversy, on indefinite leave "for security reasons."
I guess this means Jyllands-Posten is no Jyllands-Posten.
I concluded my post by stating, "Comedy Central is no Jyllands-Posten."
I may have spoken too soon because it appears that Jyllands-Posten is putting Kurt Westergaard, the man at the center of the Danish cartoon controversy, on indefinite leave "for security reasons."
I guess this means Jyllands-Posten is no Jyllands-Posten.
Comedy Central Submits to Islamic Intimidation
Comedy Central has bowed to Islamic intimidation. Although South Park was broadcast on Wednesday night not only did the network censor images of the Prophet Mohammed but they also bleeped out dialogue other than swear words. One critical piece of dialogue that was bleeped out was a speech by Kyle Broflowski about intimidation.
I was at the Cantab on Wednesday so I hoped to see the episode repeated at midnight. But Comedy Central did not rebroadcast the episode and aired another episode instead.
If that wasn't bad enough a former Comedy Central employee named Lindsay Robertson wrote a blog condemning South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone. What if any connection she had to South Park isn't clear bu she referred to Parker and Stone as "assholes":
Trey Parker and Matt Stone are assholes. This should be the real angle of the story going around today, not something that paints them as heroes for free speech. They owe an apology to every Comedy Central employee they’ve put in danger in pursuit of their own glory and publicity. Hopefully, and probably, nothing will happen except a few hundred people having anxiety for a few weeks, but if god forbid something does, it is on Trey Parker and Matt Smith’s shoulders.
What absolute drivel!!!
Parker and Stone put no one in danger. The spectre of violence was raised by Revolution Muslim when they showed an image of a mutilated Theo van Gogh and suggested this would be the fate of Parker and Stone. Yet Ms. Robertson does not see fit to condemn Revolution Muslim and indeed makes no mention of them in her post.
If we take Ms. Robertson's argument to its logical conclusion then Theo van Gogh was an asshole for making a film about violence against Muslim women and the violence visited upon him at the hands of Mohammed Bouyeri rests on van Gogh's shoulders.
What I find even more disturbing is that Hollywood isn't sticking up for Parker and Stone. Although Jon Stewart told Revolution Muslim off he did state Comedy Central was within its rights to censor the episode as it saw fit. As Eric Cartman would say, "Lame." Well, given that Comedy Central airs his show I guess Stewart knows who butters his bread and its not "Butters" Stotch.
If a cable network can so easily crumble before the rantings of a bunch of thugs then I'm afraid it doesn't say very much about its willingness to defend free speech. Comedy Central is no Jyllands-Posten.
I was at the Cantab on Wednesday so I hoped to see the episode repeated at midnight. But Comedy Central did not rebroadcast the episode and aired another episode instead.
If that wasn't bad enough a former Comedy Central employee named Lindsay Robertson wrote a blog condemning South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone. What if any connection she had to South Park isn't clear bu she referred to Parker and Stone as "assholes":
Trey Parker and Matt Stone are assholes. This should be the real angle of the story going around today, not something that paints them as heroes for free speech. They owe an apology to every Comedy Central employee they’ve put in danger in pursuit of their own glory and publicity. Hopefully, and probably, nothing will happen except a few hundred people having anxiety for a few weeks, but if god forbid something does, it is on Trey Parker and Matt Smith’s shoulders.
What absolute drivel!!!
Parker and Stone put no one in danger. The spectre of violence was raised by Revolution Muslim when they showed an image of a mutilated Theo van Gogh and suggested this would be the fate of Parker and Stone. Yet Ms. Robertson does not see fit to condemn Revolution Muslim and indeed makes no mention of them in her post.
If we take Ms. Robertson's argument to its logical conclusion then Theo van Gogh was an asshole for making a film about violence against Muslim women and the violence visited upon him at the hands of Mohammed Bouyeri rests on van Gogh's shoulders.
What I find even more disturbing is that Hollywood isn't sticking up for Parker and Stone. Although Jon Stewart told Revolution Muslim off he did state Comedy Central was within its rights to censor the episode as it saw fit. As Eric Cartman would say, "Lame." Well, given that Comedy Central airs his show I guess Stewart knows who butters his bread and its not "Butters" Stotch.
If a cable network can so easily crumble before the rantings of a bunch of thugs then I'm afraid it doesn't say very much about its willingness to defend free speech. Comedy Central is no Jyllands-Posten.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
In Defense of Lindsay Graham
William Gheen, President of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC), has apparently "outed" South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsay Graham.
By all means disagree with Graham over his support of amnesty.
By all means disagree with Graham's association with the group La Raza.
By all means disagree with Graham over his support of cap and trade.
By all means disagree with Graham over his apparent deal with the Obama Administration to close Gitmo.
But this is sheer stupidity!!!
Assuming that Graham is gay it is absolutely none of Gheen's business. If a person is gay or lesbian and if they want to come out they should do so on their terms. Gheen took that chance away from Graham.
Of course, if what Gheen says isn't true then Gheen has borne false witness.
Here's one statement from Gheen I find particularly troubling:
I personally do not care about Graham's private life, but in this situation his desire to keep this a secret may explain why he is doing a lot of political dirty work for others who have the power to reveal his secrets. Senator Graham needs to come out of the closet inside that log cabin so the public can rest assured he is not being manipulated with his secret.
If that is Graham's motive, it would certainly explain a lot.
The above statement suggests that Graham's views are not sincerely held. Now, let's disagree with Graham to our heart's content. But let us not assume he is insincere about his views however much we might not favor them. Without incontrovertible evidence Gheen is simply wrong to make such a statement.
Now to be sure Gheen could make the case that a lot more people know about him and ALIPAC than they did a week ago (I have been receiving their e-mails for quite some time now). I'm sure Gheen is figuring bad publicity is better than no publicity at all.
But as of right now why should I take anything William Gheen or ALIPAC has to say seriously?
When I think of Gheen and ALIPAC I won't think about immigration policy but rather about a loose cannon who cannot countenance disagreement.
Gheen's remarks also hurt the Tea Party movement. After all, he delivered them at a Tea Party rally in Greenville, South Carolina. Casting those kind of aspersions will simply allow liberals to say, "See, this is what they do to Republicans who they think are gay." Now one can say liberals would disparage the Tea Party anyway. True enough. But in this instance their criticism would be valid. If I were a Tea Party organizer in South Carolina I would distance myself from Gheen with the speed of Jesse Owens.
Let's be clear. Lindsay Graham deserves a great deal of criticism for his position on immigration and other matters. If Graham continues to make conservatives unhappy then by all means he should be challenged in the 2014 GOP primary in South Carolina.
But for Gheen to take this approach removes all attention from Graham's views and intrudes into a part of his life that is none of our business unless he says otherwise. All Gheen has done is open up a tidal wave of sympathy towards Graham including my own.
By all means disagree with Graham over his support of amnesty.
By all means disagree with Graham's association with the group La Raza.
By all means disagree with Graham over his support of cap and trade.
By all means disagree with Graham over his apparent deal with the Obama Administration to close Gitmo.
But this is sheer stupidity!!!
Assuming that Graham is gay it is absolutely none of Gheen's business. If a person is gay or lesbian and if they want to come out they should do so on their terms. Gheen took that chance away from Graham.
Of course, if what Gheen says isn't true then Gheen has borne false witness.
Here's one statement from Gheen I find particularly troubling:
I personally do not care about Graham's private life, but in this situation his desire to keep this a secret may explain why he is doing a lot of political dirty work for others who have the power to reveal his secrets. Senator Graham needs to come out of the closet inside that log cabin so the public can rest assured he is not being manipulated with his secret.
If that is Graham's motive, it would certainly explain a lot.
The above statement suggests that Graham's views are not sincerely held. Now, let's disagree with Graham to our heart's content. But let us not assume he is insincere about his views however much we might not favor them. Without incontrovertible evidence Gheen is simply wrong to make such a statement.
Now to be sure Gheen could make the case that a lot more people know about him and ALIPAC than they did a week ago (I have been receiving their e-mails for quite some time now). I'm sure Gheen is figuring bad publicity is better than no publicity at all.
But as of right now why should I take anything William Gheen or ALIPAC has to say seriously?
When I think of Gheen and ALIPAC I won't think about immigration policy but rather about a loose cannon who cannot countenance disagreement.
Gheen's remarks also hurt the Tea Party movement. After all, he delivered them at a Tea Party rally in Greenville, South Carolina. Casting those kind of aspersions will simply allow liberals to say, "See, this is what they do to Republicans who they think are gay." Now one can say liberals would disparage the Tea Party anyway. True enough. But in this instance their criticism would be valid. If I were a Tea Party organizer in South Carolina I would distance myself from Gheen with the speed of Jesse Owens.
Let's be clear. Lindsay Graham deserves a great deal of criticism for his position on immigration and other matters. If Graham continues to make conservatives unhappy then by all means he should be challenged in the 2014 GOP primary in South Carolina.
But for Gheen to take this approach removes all attention from Graham's views and intrudes into a part of his life that is none of our business unless he says otherwise. All Gheen has done is open up a tidal wave of sympathy towards Graham including my own.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
People Who Are Funny
Last week, I declared that Tina Fey isn't funny.
An anonymous reader replied to the post and asked a very reasonable question:
Who do you think is funny?
So here's a list of people I consider funny. Some of these people make me laugh out loud. Some of these people are more subtle in their humor. Some of these people made me laugh for one thing while others for a multitude of reasons. Some of these people aren't always funny. Some of these people aren't as funny as they used to be. Some of these people are sadly no longer with us.
I'm sure I'll leave some people off but away we go:
Mel Brooks
Gene Wilder
Richard Pryor
Bill Cosby
Ernie Kovacs
George Burns
Charlie Chaplin
Laurel & Hardy
The Marx Brothers
The Three Stooges
Harold Lloyd
Buster Keaton
John Candy
Eugene Levy
Joe Flaherty
Rick Moranis & Dave Thomas (a.k.a. Bob & Doug McKenzie)
Gilda Radner
Larraine Newman
Jane Curtin
Madeline Kahn
Bea Arthur
Slim Whitman
Carol Burnett
Harvey Korman
Tim Conway
Peter Sellers
John Belushi & Dan Aykroyd
Robin Williams
Abbott & Costello
W.C. Fields
Yogi Berra
Mel Blanc (the voice & mind behind Bugs Bunny)
Bill Murray
Catherine O'Hara
Andrea Martin
Flip Wilson
George Wallace (no not that George Wallace)
Monthy Python
Peter Cook & Dudley Moore
Rowan Atkinson
Eddie Murphy
Dennis Miller
Dana Carvey
Billy Crystal
Christopher Guest
Cheech & Chong
Wendy Liebman
John Larroquette
Not The Nine O'Clock News
Sam Kinison
Steve Landesberg
Benny Hill
Chris Farley
Steve Martin
Weird Al Yankovic
Leslie Nielsen
The Kids In The Hall
David & Jerry Zucker (creators of Airplane)
The Smothers Brothers
Woody Allen
Jon Byner
Bob Einstein (a.k.a. Super Dave Osborne)
Trey Parker & Matt Stone (creators of South Park)
Jeffrey Tambor
Gary Shandling
Johnny Carson
Conan O'Brien
Martin Short
Harry Shearer
Robert Klein
The cast of Taxi
Wayne & Shuster
Steven Wright
Sacha Baron Cohen
Bob Newhart
Jackie Mason
Rodney Dangerfield
David Brenner
David Steinberg
Mike Myers
Red Foxx
Dick Gregory
Howie Mandel
Walter Matthau
Jackie Gleason & Art Carney
Jerry Lewis
André-Phillipe Gagnon
Dom DeLuise
Jason & Randy Sklar
George Carlin
An anonymous reader replied to the post and asked a very reasonable question:
Who do you think is funny?
So here's a list of people I consider funny. Some of these people make me laugh out loud. Some of these people are more subtle in their humor. Some of these people made me laugh for one thing while others for a multitude of reasons. Some of these people aren't always funny. Some of these people aren't as funny as they used to be. Some of these people are sadly no longer with us.
I'm sure I'll leave some people off but away we go:
Mel Brooks
Gene Wilder
Richard Pryor
Bill Cosby
Ernie Kovacs
George Burns
Charlie Chaplin
Laurel & Hardy
The Marx Brothers
The Three Stooges
Harold Lloyd
Buster Keaton
John Candy
Eugene Levy
Joe Flaherty
Rick Moranis & Dave Thomas (a.k.a. Bob & Doug McKenzie)
Gilda Radner
Larraine Newman
Jane Curtin
Madeline Kahn
Bea Arthur
Slim Whitman
Carol Burnett
Harvey Korman
Tim Conway
Peter Sellers
John Belushi & Dan Aykroyd
Robin Williams
Abbott & Costello
W.C. Fields
Yogi Berra
Mel Blanc (the voice & mind behind Bugs Bunny)
Bill Murray
Catherine O'Hara
Andrea Martin
Flip Wilson
George Wallace (no not that George Wallace)
Monthy Python
Peter Cook & Dudley Moore
Rowan Atkinson
Eddie Murphy
Dennis Miller
Dana Carvey
Billy Crystal
Christopher Guest
Cheech & Chong
Wendy Liebman
John Larroquette
Not The Nine O'Clock News
Sam Kinison
Steve Landesberg
Benny Hill
Chris Farley
Steve Martin
Weird Al Yankovic
Leslie Nielsen
The Kids In The Hall
David & Jerry Zucker (creators of Airplane)
The Smothers Brothers
Woody Allen
Jon Byner
Bob Einstein (a.k.a. Super Dave Osborne)
Trey Parker & Matt Stone (creators of South Park)
Jeffrey Tambor
Gary Shandling
Johnny Carson
Conan O'Brien
Martin Short
Harry Shearer
Robert Klein
The cast of Taxi
Wayne & Shuster
Steven Wright
Sacha Baron Cohen
Bob Newhart
Jackie Mason
Rodney Dangerfield
David Brenner
David Steinberg
Mike Myers
Red Foxx
Dick Gregory
Howie Mandel
Walter Matthau
Jackie Gleason & Art Carney
Jerry Lewis
André-Phillipe Gagnon
Dom DeLuise
Jason & Randy Sklar
George Carlin
Obama Tells Heckler to Hollar at Others
A couple of nights ago, President Obama was heckled in Los Angeles during a fundraising speech he gave on behalf of California Senator Barbara Boxer who is facing a tough re-election bid.
The heckler was peeved at Obama for not repealing "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding gays and lesbians in the military. President Obama told the heckler that he was in the midst of doing just that. But when the heckler persisted Obama said, "It would make more sense to hollar that to the people who oppose it."
So it seems that President Obama thinks it's perfectly alright to heckle people with whom you disagree as long as you don't heckle him. I'm afraid his skin isn't getting any thicker.
At least one blogger believes the heckler was a plant. I disagree. The LGBTQ community is peeved with Obama over both "don't ask, don't tell" and for defending the Defense of Marriage Act. In fact, a week ago at the Cantab a poet named James Caroline was handing out flyers for a planning meeting. A week of direct action is planned for the week of May 17-22 (Harvey Milk would have been 80 on May 22nd).
Tonight, I am planning to read James (or J*me as he likes to be called) a poem which focuses on Ronald Reagan's role in the defeat of Proposition 6 in California in 1978. Milk's role in mobilizing people against the Prop 6 was, of course, the centerpiece of the film Milk which starred Sean Penn and garnered him an Academy Award.
I hope it will get J*me to look at Reagan in a new light but I have few illusions. Even though I'm in general agreement with the Cantab poets and their audience when it comes to gay rights somehow I don't think it will matter. I am sure I will be heckled for opinions that aren't mine. It's par for the course. But that won't stop me from trying.
The heckler was peeved at Obama for not repealing "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding gays and lesbians in the military. President Obama told the heckler that he was in the midst of doing just that. But when the heckler persisted Obama said, "It would make more sense to hollar that to the people who oppose it."
So it seems that President Obama thinks it's perfectly alright to heckle people with whom you disagree as long as you don't heckle him. I'm afraid his skin isn't getting any thicker.
At least one blogger believes the heckler was a plant. I disagree. The LGBTQ community is peeved with Obama over both "don't ask, don't tell" and for defending the Defense of Marriage Act. In fact, a week ago at the Cantab a poet named James Caroline was handing out flyers for a planning meeting. A week of direct action is planned for the week of May 17-22 (Harvey Milk would have been 80 on May 22nd).
Tonight, I am planning to read James (or J*me as he likes to be called) a poem which focuses on Ronald Reagan's role in the defeat of Proposition 6 in California in 1978. Milk's role in mobilizing people against the Prop 6 was, of course, the centerpiece of the film Milk which starred Sean Penn and garnered him an Academy Award.
I hope it will get J*me to look at Reagan in a new light but I have few illusions. Even though I'm in general agreement with the Cantab poets and their audience when it comes to gay rights somehow I don't think it will matter. I am sure I will be heckled for opinions that aren't mine. It's par for the course. But that won't stop me from trying.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Radical Muslim Website Threatens South Park Creators
Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the co-creators of South Park, have been threatened on a Muslim website following the airing of the 200th episode of South Park last Wednesday.
Revolution Muslim, a group based Brooklyn, objected to the depiction of the Prophet Mohammed in the episode. Their website posted an image of the mutilated body of Theo van Gogh and suggested Parker and Stone would probably end up like him. The Dutch filmmaker collaborated with Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the ten minute film Submission which addressed the issue of violence against Muslim women. In November 2004, Van Gogh was shot and stabbed in broad daylight by Mohammed Bouyeri.
In addition to posting the gruesome photo of van Gogh, Revolution Muslim also published the address of Comedy Central in New York as well as the address of Parker and Stone's production studio in Los Angeles. A website in the U.K. devoted to South Park has returned the favor.
Ironicially, Mohammed is never actually seen in the episode. He is dressed up in a bear suit. Consider what Douglas Murray wrote in The Daily Telegraph:
All of which of course just confirms the point that the South Park boys were making. The anniversary show figured the inventors of all the major world religions. They showed Buddha snorting drugs. They did not even show Mohammed, as their broadcast network wouldn’t allow them to. Noticeably, no death threats have emanated from Buddhists for showing their founder as a drug-addict. But for not even showing Mohammed, and for pointedly demonstrating that they could not, an extremist Muslim group has threatened them.
In another twist of irony when Mohammed was physically depicted in an episode called "Super Best Friends" which originally aired in July 2001 never heard was a discouraging word. But when Parker and Stone did an episode in April 2006 called "Cartoon Wars" which was a commentary on the Danish cartoon controversy Comedy Central refused to show an image of Mohammed.
For his part, Stone said in an interview with Boing Boing, "It matters to me when I talk about Mohammed that I can say we did this, we did this and we did this and I can stand behind it. Me. Just me. I don't think it's going to change the world. But for us it's this has got to be the way it is for our show. So it does matter to me. Those kind of discussions matter."
Yes these discussions do matter. But when President Obama orders all words referring to Islam be removed from national security documents it does not create a climate conducive to candid conversation. It also creates a climate where organizations like Revolution Muslim can operate with impunity. We are not far removed from being prohibited from stating that al Qaeda attacked American soil on September 11, 2001.
Revolution Muslim, a group based Brooklyn, objected to the depiction of the Prophet Mohammed in the episode. Their website posted an image of the mutilated body of Theo van Gogh and suggested Parker and Stone would probably end up like him. The Dutch filmmaker collaborated with Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the ten minute film Submission which addressed the issue of violence against Muslim women. In November 2004, Van Gogh was shot and stabbed in broad daylight by Mohammed Bouyeri.
In addition to posting the gruesome photo of van Gogh, Revolution Muslim also published the address of Comedy Central in New York as well as the address of Parker and Stone's production studio in Los Angeles. A website in the U.K. devoted to South Park has returned the favor.
Ironicially, Mohammed is never actually seen in the episode. He is dressed up in a bear suit. Consider what Douglas Murray wrote in The Daily Telegraph:
All of which of course just confirms the point that the South Park boys were making. The anniversary show figured the inventors of all the major world religions. They showed Buddha snorting drugs. They did not even show Mohammed, as their broadcast network wouldn’t allow them to. Noticeably, no death threats have emanated from Buddhists for showing their founder as a drug-addict. But for not even showing Mohammed, and for pointedly demonstrating that they could not, an extremist Muslim group has threatened them.
In another twist of irony when Mohammed was physically depicted in an episode called "Super Best Friends" which originally aired in July 2001 never heard was a discouraging word. But when Parker and Stone did an episode in April 2006 called "Cartoon Wars" which was a commentary on the Danish cartoon controversy Comedy Central refused to show an image of Mohammed.
For his part, Stone said in an interview with Boing Boing, "It matters to me when I talk about Mohammed that I can say we did this, we did this and we did this and I can stand behind it. Me. Just me. I don't think it's going to change the world. But for us it's this has got to be the way it is for our show. So it does matter to me. Those kind of discussions matter."
Yes these discussions do matter. But when President Obama orders all words referring to Islam be removed from national security documents it does not create a climate conducive to candid conversation. It also creates a climate where organizations like Revolution Muslim can operate with impunity. We are not far removed from being prohibited from stating that al Qaeda attacked American soil on September 11, 2001.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Thoughts on the Oklahoma City Bombing 15 Years After
I'm glad I kept a diary.
I knew I was overseas when the Oklahoma City bombings occurred. But I couldn't remember where exactly I was when they occurred. My memory simply isn't what it used to be. But I can tell you I was based in London for the winter semester of 1995 where I was working as a parliamentary intern for Jimmy Wray, a Labour MP from Glasgow. It was also around this time I accompanied Jimmy to a Council of Europe meeting in Strasbourg.
So I rummaged through my old diaries and lo and behold there it was. As it turns out I found out while having lunch with a young woman named Joy Kramper who told me what had happened. She was a student from Catholic University in Washington D.C. who was also working as an intern at Westminster. We were both part of an exchange program with the University of Leeds.
If I remember correctly she interned for a Labour MP named George Robertson who was also from Scotland. When Tony Blair became Prime Minister two years later he appointed Robertson as Minister of Defence. Robertson would later serve as Secretary General of NATO and is now a member of the House of Lords.
What I do remember is that I was quite fond of Joy. We went out a couple of times. On one occasion, we went to see Conversations With My Father starring Judd Hirsch at the Old Vic. However, nothing would ultimately come of it. It wasn't the first time and it certainly wasn't the last. C'est la vie. The last time I saw her was by chance in Ottawa either later that same year or in 1996. But I digress.
I should note that I did not find out what had happened until the day after the attacks. It is worth noting the attacks were first commented upon in the Commons on the 20th. So here's what I wrote in my diary on April 20, 1995:
It was during lunch that she told me about the terrorist bombing of a U.S. government building in Oklahoma City killing over 50 people, many of them infants from the nursery in the basement of the building. Speculation abounds as to who could be behind such a heinous and cowardly act - Abu Nidal, the Branch Davidians, the IRA. Although Joy has no connection to Oklahoma, it both saddened and frightened her. I felt my stomach turn when I saw the picture of a fireman holding a bloody and helpless infant fighting for its survival. You can only wonder how could human beings do such a thing. Yet it is something for which we have no shortage of talent and resources. What a bloody waste.
A couple of days later, Jimmy and I traveled to France and it was there I found out that it wasn't the Branch Davidians who were responsible for the bombing. However, Timothy McVeigh cited the 1993 ATF raid on their compound in Waco, Texas exactly two years before which claimed the lives of 76 people (including at least 20 children) as a motive for his actions. Whatever his motives, the Oklahoma City bombing would claim the lives of 168 people including 19 children under the age of six. McVeigh would be executed for his act of barbarism in June 2001.
There's no doubt the Oklahoma City bombing was the turning point in Bill Clinton's presidency. It was scarcely 100 days after Republicans had taken control of both Houses of Congress for the first time in four decades. Clinton was on the ropes and appeared headed to join Jimmy Carter as a one term wonder. But the liberal media painted Gingrich and company, talk radio and McVeigh with a broad brush while portraying Clinton as a bulwark against right-wing extremism.
Well, if it worked in 1995 then why not in 2010? Both Charles Krauthammer and Jim Antle of The American Spectator have already rebuked Clinton so I won't comment on his most recent remarks except to say that the day Tea Party activists begin wantonly murdering children then Clinton might be more worthy of my attention. Otherwise, the former President's comments actually diminish the evil perpetrated by McVeigh as well as Terry Nichols.
I knew I was overseas when the Oklahoma City bombings occurred. But I couldn't remember where exactly I was when they occurred. My memory simply isn't what it used to be. But I can tell you I was based in London for the winter semester of 1995 where I was working as a parliamentary intern for Jimmy Wray, a Labour MP from Glasgow. It was also around this time I accompanied Jimmy to a Council of Europe meeting in Strasbourg.
So I rummaged through my old diaries and lo and behold there it was. As it turns out I found out while having lunch with a young woman named Joy Kramper who told me what had happened. She was a student from Catholic University in Washington D.C. who was also working as an intern at Westminster. We were both part of an exchange program with the University of Leeds.
If I remember correctly she interned for a Labour MP named George Robertson who was also from Scotland. When Tony Blair became Prime Minister two years later he appointed Robertson as Minister of Defence. Robertson would later serve as Secretary General of NATO and is now a member of the House of Lords.
What I do remember is that I was quite fond of Joy. We went out a couple of times. On one occasion, we went to see Conversations With My Father starring Judd Hirsch at the Old Vic. However, nothing would ultimately come of it. It wasn't the first time and it certainly wasn't the last. C'est la vie. The last time I saw her was by chance in Ottawa either later that same year or in 1996. But I digress.
I should note that I did not find out what had happened until the day after the attacks. It is worth noting the attacks were first commented upon in the Commons on the 20th. So here's what I wrote in my diary on April 20, 1995:
It was during lunch that she told me about the terrorist bombing of a U.S. government building in Oklahoma City killing over 50 people, many of them infants from the nursery in the basement of the building. Speculation abounds as to who could be behind such a heinous and cowardly act - Abu Nidal, the Branch Davidians, the IRA. Although Joy has no connection to Oklahoma, it both saddened and frightened her. I felt my stomach turn when I saw the picture of a fireman holding a bloody and helpless infant fighting for its survival. You can only wonder how could human beings do such a thing. Yet it is something for which we have no shortage of talent and resources. What a bloody waste.
A couple of days later, Jimmy and I traveled to France and it was there I found out that it wasn't the Branch Davidians who were responsible for the bombing. However, Timothy McVeigh cited the 1993 ATF raid on their compound in Waco, Texas exactly two years before which claimed the lives of 76 people (including at least 20 children) as a motive for his actions. Whatever his motives, the Oklahoma City bombing would claim the lives of 168 people including 19 children under the age of six. McVeigh would be executed for his act of barbarism in June 2001.
There's no doubt the Oklahoma City bombing was the turning point in Bill Clinton's presidency. It was scarcely 100 days after Republicans had taken control of both Houses of Congress for the first time in four decades. Clinton was on the ropes and appeared headed to join Jimmy Carter as a one term wonder. But the liberal media painted Gingrich and company, talk radio and McVeigh with a broad brush while portraying Clinton as a bulwark against right-wing extremism.
Well, if it worked in 1995 then why not in 2010? Both Charles Krauthammer and Jim Antle of The American Spectator have already rebuked Clinton so I won't comment on his most recent remarks except to say that the day Tea Party activists begin wantonly murdering children then Clinton might be more worthy of my attention. Otherwise, the former President's comments actually diminish the evil perpetrated by McVeigh as well as Terry Nichols.
Iranian Cleric Claims Scantily Clad Women Cause Earthquakes
According to Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi, a senior Iranian cleric, scantily clad women cause earthquakes.
"Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes," said Sedighi.
Now I've heard of women making the earth move but Carole King convincingly argues that men are perfectly capable of having the same effect on the fairer sex.
Well, at least he didn't blame the Jews.
"Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes," said Sedighi.
Now I've heard of women making the earth move but Carole King convincingly argues that men are perfectly capable of having the same effect on the fairer sex.
Well, at least he didn't blame the Jews.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Mets Outlast Cardinals 2-1 in 20 Innings
While I was watching the Red Sox-Rays game tonight, Sox announcers Jerry Remy and Don Orsillo showed the hand operated scoreboard in left field (it's part of the Green Monster). They pointed out that the New York Mets and St. Louis Cardinals game was scoreless in the 16th inning.
I remembered the Mets-Cardinals matchup was the FOX Saturday Baseball Game of the Week. So I quickly flipped over and sure enough the game was now in the 17th inning.
It was at this time that I told my roomie Christopher that I nearly went to a game between the Montreal Expos and the Los Angeles Dodgers in August 1989 that lasted 22 innings. The Dodgers won the game 1-0 on a solo home run by Rick Dempsey off Dennis Martinez. Curiously, both were teammates on the 1983 World Series champion Orioles (now those are four words you won't hear this year).
The Cardinals ran out of pitchers and began using position players to pitch. Infielder Felipe Lopez pitched for the Redbirds in the 18th while outfielder Joe Mather pitched in the 19th and 20th innings.
The Mets broke the deadlock in the top of the 19th on a bases loaded sacrifice fly by Jeff Francoeur to score Jose Reyes. But Francisco "K-Rod" Rodriguez couldn't close the door. A single by Yadier Molina scored Albert Pujols to tie the game back up. Actually, the Cardinals had a chance to win but inexplicably Ryan Ludwick attempted to steal second while Pujols was at the plate.
A sacrifice fly by Jose Reyes in the top of the 20th gave the Mets a 2-1 lead and Mike Pelfrey recorded his first major league save. The game lasted 6 hours and 53 minutes. Both teams are thanking their lucky stars that their next match up tomorrow is a night game.
Believe it or not, this isn't the longest game these two teams have played. On September 11, 1974, at Shea Stadium, the Cardinals defeated the Mets 4-3 in 25 innings when Bake McBride (who would be named NL Rookie of the Year in '74) scored the winning run on a botched pick off move. It took more than 35 years for the Mets to get even.
I remembered the Mets-Cardinals matchup was the FOX Saturday Baseball Game of the Week. So I quickly flipped over and sure enough the game was now in the 17th inning.
It was at this time that I told my roomie Christopher that I nearly went to a game between the Montreal Expos and the Los Angeles Dodgers in August 1989 that lasted 22 innings. The Dodgers won the game 1-0 on a solo home run by Rick Dempsey off Dennis Martinez. Curiously, both were teammates on the 1983 World Series champion Orioles (now those are four words you won't hear this year).
The Cardinals ran out of pitchers and began using position players to pitch. Infielder Felipe Lopez pitched for the Redbirds in the 18th while outfielder Joe Mather pitched in the 19th and 20th innings.
The Mets broke the deadlock in the top of the 19th on a bases loaded sacrifice fly by Jeff Francoeur to score Jose Reyes. But Francisco "K-Rod" Rodriguez couldn't close the door. A single by Yadier Molina scored Albert Pujols to tie the game back up. Actually, the Cardinals had a chance to win but inexplicably Ryan Ludwick attempted to steal second while Pujols was at the plate.
A sacrifice fly by Jose Reyes in the top of the 20th gave the Mets a 2-1 lead and Mike Pelfrey recorded his first major league save. The game lasted 6 hours and 53 minutes. Both teams are thanking their lucky stars that their next match up tomorrow is a night game.
Believe it or not, this isn't the longest game these two teams have played. On September 11, 1974, at Shea Stadium, the Cardinals defeated the Mets 4-3 in 25 innings when Bake McBride (who would be named NL Rookie of the Year in '74) scored the winning run on a botched pick off move. It took more than 35 years for the Mets to get even.
Jimenez Throws First No-Hitter of 2010
Colorado Rockies pitcher Ubaldo Jimenez threw a no-hitter against the Atlanta Braves tonight despite walking six batters. The Rockies won the game 4-0.
It is the first no-hitter in Rockies history. The New York Mets, San Diego Padres and Tampa Bay Rays are the only teams in MLB to never have had any of their pitchers accomplish this feat.
Like most no-hitters it featured an absolutely spectacular defensive play. Rockies centerfielder Dexter Fowler made a sensational catch off the bat of Troy Glaus.
At 26, Jimenez is getting better with each season. He might not throw another no-hitter but it would come as no great surprise to me if he did.
It is the first no-hitter in Rockies history. The New York Mets, San Diego Padres and Tampa Bay Rays are the only teams in MLB to never have had any of their pitchers accomplish this feat.
Like most no-hitters it featured an absolutely spectacular defensive play. Rockies centerfielder Dexter Fowler made a sensational catch off the bat of Troy Glaus.
At 26, Jimenez is getting better with each season. He might not throw another no-hitter but it would come as no great surprise to me if he did.
Carlos Franqui, 1921-2010. R.I.P.
Carlos Franqui, a one time ally turned bitter foe of Fidel Castro, died on April 15th in Puerto Rico of bronchial and heart problems. He was 89.
Franqui was part of the July 26th Movement along with Castro and Che Guevara that would overthrow the Batista government in 1959. Castro put Franqui in charge of editing the official Communist Party newspaper, Revolucion. In addition to politics, Franqui was a writer, poet and art critic. Over time Franqui began to have strong disagreements with Castro over the direction of the revolution and would eventually resign from the paper.
In 1968, Franqui became persona non grata in Cuba after he broke with Castro over the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. Castro literally expunged Franqui out of existence. Franqui responded to this by writing a poem:
I discover my photographic death.
Do I exist?
I am a little black,
I am a little white,
I am a little shit,
On Fidel's vest.
Franqui wrote several books critiquing both Fidel and the Cuban Revolution. He also wrote, "Culture is liberty and the revolution is the negation of liberty."
Franqui was part of the July 26th Movement along with Castro and Che Guevara that would overthrow the Batista government in 1959. Castro put Franqui in charge of editing the official Communist Party newspaper, Revolucion. In addition to politics, Franqui was a writer, poet and art critic. Over time Franqui began to have strong disagreements with Castro over the direction of the revolution and would eventually resign from the paper.
In 1968, Franqui became persona non grata in Cuba after he broke with Castro over the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. Castro literally expunged Franqui out of existence. Franqui responded to this by writing a poem:
I discover my photographic death.
Do I exist?
I am a little black,
I am a little white,
I am a little shit,
On Fidel's vest.
Franqui wrote several books critiquing both Fidel and the Cuban Revolution. He also wrote, "Culture is liberty and the revolution is the negation of liberty."
Friday, April 16, 2010
Daryl Gates, 1926-2010. R.I.P.
Daryl Gates, who served as the Chief of the Los Angeles Police Department from 1978 to 1992, died today of bladder cancer. He was 83.
Gates became an international figure in April 1992 during the Los Angeles riots which followed the acquittal of the four LAPD officers caught assaulting Rodney King on tape. He would retire as police chief later that year.
During his time at the helm of the LAPD, Gates became an early supporter of the use of SWAT teams and would also pioneer the anti-drug educational program D.A.R.E. but those achievements were overshadowed by his response to the riots as well as his penchant to shoot from the hip which led to charges of racism.
Gates relationship with L.A.'s African-American community deteriorated in 1982 while ironically enough explaining why the LAPD had done away with a chokehold. He said that the arteries of black people "do not open up as fast as on normal people". In an interview Gates did with The L.A. Times in May 2009 he stated the fallout from that incident "really hurt".
Gates became an international figure in April 1992 during the Los Angeles riots which followed the acquittal of the four LAPD officers caught assaulting Rodney King on tape. He would retire as police chief later that year.
During his time at the helm of the LAPD, Gates became an early supporter of the use of SWAT teams and would also pioneer the anti-drug educational program D.A.R.E. but those achievements were overshadowed by his response to the riots as well as his penchant to shoot from the hip which led to charges of racism.
Gates relationship with L.A.'s African-American community deteriorated in 1982 while ironically enough explaining why the LAPD had done away with a chokehold. He said that the arteries of black people "do not open up as fast as on normal people". In an interview Gates did with The L.A. Times in May 2009 he stated the fallout from that incident "really hurt".
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Hope for Zimbabwe?
I came across this article in The New York Times by Douglas Rogers titled "Zimbabwe's Accidental Triumph".
How often have Zimbabwe and triumph been used in the same sentence in the past decade? I had to read on.
Rogers is a journalist who was born and raised in Zimbabwe who now resides in Brooklyn while his parents remain in Zimbabwe. Last year he came out with a book titled The Last Resort: A Memoir of Zimbabwe. Without the benefit of having read his book, Rogers reminds me a great deal of Peter Godwin. He's also a Zimbabwean born journalist living in New York whose parents still live in Zimbabwe. Godwin came out with a book titled When a Crocodile Eats The Sun which I reviewed on the IC main page in September 2007. I described it as perhaps "the most heartbreaking book I had ever read."
This is perhaps where Godwin and Rogers diverge. Rogers has seeingly found the silver lining in the dark clouds that have hung over Zimbabwe over the past decade:
But in 2000, within weeks of losing a constitutional referendum to entrench his power, Mr. Mugabe began the catastrophic land invasions that resulted in the eviction of almost all the country’s 4,500 white farmers and the ruin of what was once a model post-colonial African country. Ever since, the narrative of Zimbabwe has been one of race. Rare is the speech in which Mr. Mugabe does not rail against whites, colonialists, imperialists or the West. Members of his ZANU-PF party have spoken of a “Rwandan solution” for Zimbabwe’s whites.
Westerners have simply accepted this narrative of blacks and whites pitted against one another. But, in doing so, they have missed the inspiring story of what has actually been happening in Zimbabwe over the past decade. After years of mass unemployment, mutant inflation, chronic shortages and state violence, Zimbabweans simply don’t care about skin color. In fact, Mr. Mugabe has managed to achieve the exact opposite of what he set out to do in 2000: the forging of a postracial state.
Rogers goes on to write about the rise of white politicians supported by overwhelmingly by black constituents such as Roy Bennett (who is a part of Godwin's book as well) and Brian Jones, the mayor of Mutare which is Zimbabwe's third largest city. Black and white unite. Well, with the silence of the rest of the African continent and the inaction of the West towards Mugabe, what other choice did they have?
The 30th anniversary of Zimbabwean independence will take place this weekend. One can only hope that by 2040 the postracial Zimbabwe that Rogers writes about will be fully realized.
How often have Zimbabwe and triumph been used in the same sentence in the past decade? I had to read on.
Rogers is a journalist who was born and raised in Zimbabwe who now resides in Brooklyn while his parents remain in Zimbabwe. Last year he came out with a book titled The Last Resort: A Memoir of Zimbabwe. Without the benefit of having read his book, Rogers reminds me a great deal of Peter Godwin. He's also a Zimbabwean born journalist living in New York whose parents still live in Zimbabwe. Godwin came out with a book titled When a Crocodile Eats The Sun which I reviewed on the IC main page in September 2007. I described it as perhaps "the most heartbreaking book I had ever read."
This is perhaps where Godwin and Rogers diverge. Rogers has seeingly found the silver lining in the dark clouds that have hung over Zimbabwe over the past decade:
But in 2000, within weeks of losing a constitutional referendum to entrench his power, Mr. Mugabe began the catastrophic land invasions that resulted in the eviction of almost all the country’s 4,500 white farmers and the ruin of what was once a model post-colonial African country. Ever since, the narrative of Zimbabwe has been one of race. Rare is the speech in which Mr. Mugabe does not rail against whites, colonialists, imperialists or the West. Members of his ZANU-PF party have spoken of a “Rwandan solution” for Zimbabwe’s whites.
Westerners have simply accepted this narrative of blacks and whites pitted against one another. But, in doing so, they have missed the inspiring story of what has actually been happening in Zimbabwe over the past decade. After years of mass unemployment, mutant inflation, chronic shortages and state violence, Zimbabweans simply don’t care about skin color. In fact, Mr. Mugabe has managed to achieve the exact opposite of what he set out to do in 2000: the forging of a postracial state.
Rogers goes on to write about the rise of white politicians supported by overwhelmingly by black constituents such as Roy Bennett (who is a part of Godwin's book as well) and Brian Jones, the mayor of Mutare which is Zimbabwe's third largest city. Black and white unite. Well, with the silence of the rest of the African continent and the inaction of the West towards Mugabe, what other choice did they have?
The 30th anniversary of Zimbabwean independence will take place this weekend. One can only hope that by 2040 the postracial Zimbabwe that Rogers writes about will be fully realized.
What Planet is Obama On?
President Obama unveiled his plans for NASA today at the Kennedy Space Center.
Obama is jettisoning President Bush's goal of returning to the Moon by 2020. Instead, Obama wants to orbit Mars by the mid-2030s.
But here is what really struck me:
So today, I’d like to talk about the next chapter in this story. The challenges facing our space program are different, and our imperatives for this program are different, than in decades past. We’re no longer racing against an adversary. We’re no longer competing to achieve a singular goal like reaching the Moon. In fact, what was once a global competition has long since become a global collaboration. But while the measure of our achievements has changed a great deal over the past 50 years, what we do -- or fail to do -- in seeking new frontiers is no less consequential for our future in space and here on Earth.
What planet is Obama is on?
The idea we're no longer racing against an adversary in space is remarkable in its naivete. If Obama thinks China or Russia is without its ambitions in space then it appears he has a large space between his ears. In fact, China & Russia are scheduled to embark on a joint unmanned mission to Mars in August 2010. Perhaps Obama doesn't appreciate the gravity of the situation.
It is also worth noting there is a schism amongst the ranks of Apollo 11. Buzz Aldrin, fresh from his stint on Dancing With The Stars, is an enthusiastic supporter of Obama's plan and was present for the President's remarks. Neil Armstrong, on the other hand, has co-written an open letter criticizing Obama's approach.
All of which makes me wonder what Michael Collins, the third member of the Apollo 11 crew, thinks of President Obama's plans? He's the tiebreaking vote.
Obama is jettisoning President Bush's goal of returning to the Moon by 2020. Instead, Obama wants to orbit Mars by the mid-2030s.
But here is what really struck me:
So today, I’d like to talk about the next chapter in this story. The challenges facing our space program are different, and our imperatives for this program are different, than in decades past. We’re no longer racing against an adversary. We’re no longer competing to achieve a singular goal like reaching the Moon. In fact, what was once a global competition has long since become a global collaboration. But while the measure of our achievements has changed a great deal over the past 50 years, what we do -- or fail to do -- in seeking new frontiers is no less consequential for our future in space and here on Earth.
What planet is Obama is on?
The idea we're no longer racing against an adversary in space is remarkable in its naivete. If Obama thinks China or Russia is without its ambitions in space then it appears he has a large space between his ears. In fact, China & Russia are scheduled to embark on a joint unmanned mission to Mars in August 2010. Perhaps Obama doesn't appreciate the gravity of the situation.
It is also worth noting there is a schism amongst the ranks of Apollo 11. Buzz Aldrin, fresh from his stint on Dancing With The Stars, is an enthusiastic supporter of Obama's plan and was present for the President's remarks. Neil Armstrong, on the other hand, has co-written an open letter criticizing Obama's approach.
All of which makes me wonder what Michael Collins, the third member of the Apollo 11 crew, thinks of President Obama's plans? He's the tiebreaking vote.
Benjamin Hooks, 1925-2010. R.I.P.
Benjamin Hooks, best known for his tenure as Executive Director of the NAACP from 1977 to 1992, died today after a long illness. He was 85.
Hooks became a civil rights activists after his experiences serving in Europe during WWII. Given the task of guarding Italian prisoners of war, the POWs were allowed to eat in restaurants but these restaurants were off limits to Hooks and other black soldiers.
Prior to his stewardship of the NAACP, Hooks had a varied career in his native Memphis - minister, entrepreneur, lawyer, criminal court judge (the first African-American to sit on the bench in Tennessee). Whatever his occupation, Hooks was a major player in the civil rights movement.
It is also worth noting that Hooks was a Republican. After supporting Richard Nixon in 1972, Nixon appointed Hooks to the Federal Communications Commission.
However, Hooks soured on the GOP once he led the NAACP. Towards the end of his tenure with the NAACP Hooks commented on Republican administrations:
I’ve had the misfortune of serving eight years under Reagan and three under Bush. It makes a great deal of difference about your expectations. We’ve had to get rid of a lot of programs we had hoped for, so we could fight to save what we already had.
Needless to say, President Reagan saw things differently. Consider an excerpt from this letter he wrote to Hooks in January 1983 (which can be found in the book Reagan: A Life in Letters edited by Kiron Skinner, Annelise Graebner Anderson and Martin Anderson). Reagan was responding to Hooks' assertion his administration was attempting to "roll back hard-won gains of black Americans":
Ben if only it were possible to look into each other's hearts and minds, you would find no trace of prejudice or bigotry in mine. I know that's hard for you to believe and that's too bad because together we could do more for the people you represent than either of us can do alone.
Prejudice is not a failing peculiar to one race, it can and does exist in people of every race and ethnic background. It takes individual effort to root it ou of one's heart. In my case my father and mother saw that it never got a start. I shall be forever grateful to them.
Sincerely,
Ron
Unfortunately, Reagan's letter was in vain and Hooks would not have a change of heart.
However, this did not stop then President George W. Bush for bestowing Hooks with the Presidential Medal of Freedom back in 2007 for his contributions to the civil rights movement. Bush said, "Dr. Hooks was a calm yet forceful voice for fairness, opportunity and personal responsibility. He never tired or faltered in demanding that our nation live up to its founding ideals of liberty and equality."
Hooks became a civil rights activists after his experiences serving in Europe during WWII. Given the task of guarding Italian prisoners of war, the POWs were allowed to eat in restaurants but these restaurants were off limits to Hooks and other black soldiers.
Prior to his stewardship of the NAACP, Hooks had a varied career in his native Memphis - minister, entrepreneur, lawyer, criminal court judge (the first African-American to sit on the bench in Tennessee). Whatever his occupation, Hooks was a major player in the civil rights movement.
It is also worth noting that Hooks was a Republican. After supporting Richard Nixon in 1972, Nixon appointed Hooks to the Federal Communications Commission.
However, Hooks soured on the GOP once he led the NAACP. Towards the end of his tenure with the NAACP Hooks commented on Republican administrations:
I’ve had the misfortune of serving eight years under Reagan and three under Bush. It makes a great deal of difference about your expectations. We’ve had to get rid of a lot of programs we had hoped for, so we could fight to save what we already had.
Needless to say, President Reagan saw things differently. Consider an excerpt from this letter he wrote to Hooks in January 1983 (which can be found in the book Reagan: A Life in Letters edited by Kiron Skinner, Annelise Graebner Anderson and Martin Anderson). Reagan was responding to Hooks' assertion his administration was attempting to "roll back hard-won gains of black Americans":
Ben if only it were possible to look into each other's hearts and minds, you would find no trace of prejudice or bigotry in mine. I know that's hard for you to believe and that's too bad because together we could do more for the people you represent than either of us can do alone.
Prejudice is not a failing peculiar to one race, it can and does exist in people of every race and ethnic background. It takes individual effort to root it ou of one's heart. In my case my father and mother saw that it never got a start. I shall be forever grateful to them.
Sincerely,
Ron
Unfortunately, Reagan's letter was in vain and Hooks would not have a change of heart.
However, this did not stop then President George W. Bush for bestowing Hooks with the Presidential Medal of Freedom back in 2007 for his contributions to the civil rights movement. Bush said, "Dr. Hooks was a calm yet forceful voice for fairness, opportunity and personal responsibility. He never tired or faltered in demanding that our nation live up to its founding ideals of liberty and equality."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)














